The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the compulsory retirement of a civilian carpenter at the Indian Air Force, ruling that misconduct involving forged documents and unauthorised collection of money cannot be shielded under the umbrella of trade union activity.
A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan dismissed the employee’s writ petition challenging an earlier order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, which had upheld the disciplinary action.
The petitioner, posted at the Air Force Station in Faridabad, was charged in 2016 with collecting union subscription money from around 30 colleagues despite holding no authorised position in the Civilian Karamchari Union. The chargesheet also alleged that he had forged receipt books and used the union’s registration number without permission to lend the collections an official appearance.
The disciplinary authority eventually imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement in May 2017, after the employee reportedly failed to appear before the inquiry officer despite multiple notices. The petitioner argued before the High Court that the proceedings suffered from procedural lapses and that the entire matter pertained to internal union affairs, which fell outside the scope of departmental discipline.
The bench rejected both arguments. It held that the misconduct in question went well beyond participation in union activity, and squarely involved questions of integrity and financial accountability that any government servant is expected to uphold. Rule 3(1) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 requires every government employee to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty, and to do nothing unbecoming of a public servant.
The Court also noted that findings of guilt had been consistently recorded by the inquiry officer, the disciplinary authority, the appellate authority and the Tribunal, supported by witness testimonies, documentary evidence and the petitioner’s own partial admissions. There was no evidence, the bench added, of any violation of natural justice during the inquiry process.
Holding that the punishment was not disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct, the High Court declined to interfere with the disciplinary action, leaving the compulsory retirement order intact.
The ruling is consistent with a line of Delhi High Court decisions that have upheld compulsory retirement as a valid penalty in cases involving forgery, financial irregularities and breach of integrity by employees of public sector banks, government departments and statutory bodies.
